Does this mean that if I had a 60D I wouldn't need a camcorder?
It depends on a lot of things. Equipment-wise, a vidSLR may be good with stills but for certain things in video, it will struggle. The 60d for example has very poor AF. Basically, it has no AF if it will achieve focus in 1-2 sec. Once the subject moves, it can't keep with it. So, a 60d may be good at set shots or if you are making an indie, but quite amazingly, it will falter shooting an afternoon soccer game with the kids.
Another thing the 60d and most vid-SLRs are weak at is duration of shooting. Because they are not really video cameras, they can't shoot very long. Depending on a lot of variables, they can shoot straight for 5min to maybe even 29min. So, if you have a recital or a concert or a long speech, you might get cut off because the camera overheated. Or even it didn't, because of European regulation, you can't shoot more than 30min in video.
And since they are not video cameras, even if these restrictions aren't there, you'd probably run out of storage space as some cameras don't have the more compact sized AVCHD files. That 32gb will just probably run for an hour.
And even if your file format is efficient, because these are not video cameras, you will probably run out of batteries first. Unlike true videocams, you can always buy a higher capacity battery as the battery is external with no housing to limit its size. Vid-DSLRs
It will take maybe 2-3 years before the functionality of video and stills meet. However, this is not entirely true either. The Sony VG-20, for example is a videocam that has none of the limitations I mentioned in video, but can take very good 16mp stills as well. For U$1,600 for the body, it's a bit on the semi-high side. Add to that the NEX lenses, you could hit U$3,000 easy. But that's not any different if you got a semi-pro dslr or videocam.
What you may not like is the form factor. The VG-20 is a videocam by design. So, you don't have that box type stills camera in there. As I said, in 2-3 years, you can have that functionality.
The closest one can go to a true very good stills and video is the 2+ year old Panasonic GH2. Great in video, and very good in photos (some may dispute this, but I stand by this). This is as good as it goes for now of having both good video and photo.
There is room for improvements and one of them is size. Hence 2-3 years is a good time to see what is coming out of the woodwork. For sure, the GH2 will be upgraded to a GH3, and for sure, the MILCs will make their videos better through time. For now, the canon 60d, very good as it is for its price class is definitely not the best to do video, especially for most types of shooting or even action shooting.
'Always in the process of changing, growing, and transforming.'
|Post (hide subjects)||Posted by||When|
|Nov 11, 2011|
|Nov 13, 2011|
|Nov 21, 2011|
|Nov 23, 2011|
|Dec 2, 2011|
|Dec 6, 2011|
|Dec 7, 2011|
|Dec 8, 2011|
|Jan 13, 2012|
|Jan 14, 2012|
|Nov 26, 2011|
|Blue and yellow in water by fireplace33|
from Ink and water
|Kylmä joki kopio by Kaappo|
from Shutter speed 1/25 or slower
|WR_2.8_13 copy copy by photoprof|